WASHINGTON — Richard M. Burr, the Republican tobacco-state senator who tried a filibuster this week against a bill that would allow the Food and Drug Administration to regulate the cigarette industry, flew home to North Carolina for the weekend, conceding that the landmark legislation was likely to pass next week.

Although a Senate filibuster killed a similar measure in 1998, times have apparently changed. Mr. Burr acknowledged Thursday that his effort would probably be blocked by a cloture vote that the Senate majority leader, Harry Reid of Nevada, has scheduled for Monday evening. “Clearly the cloture motion will pass,” Mr. Burr said in an interview.

“Probably with flying colors,” David Ward, his press secretary, added.

After that, a final vote on the tobacco control measure could come Wednesday, Senate staff members said.

The House has already passed almost identical legislation, and President Obama has indicated he will sign the measure.

Tobacco regulation used to be a fight to the death in Congress, but now Mr. Burr stood largely alone in the filibuster effort.

“There’s been a fundamental change in the last 10 years,” Matthew L. Myers, president of the Campaign for Tobacco-Free Kids, an advocacy group that has been a leading proponent of the legislation, said in an interview Friday. He noted the rising public concern about the effect of secondhand smoke on children and the trend toward smoke-free indoor air laws in most states — even, effective next year, in Mr. Burr’s home state.

“There has been a change in attitudes about the need to act to reduce tobacco use and a condemnation of the tobacco industry’s continuing behavior,” Mr. Myers said. “I don’t predict Senate votes, but I think the debate this week showed extremely broad support.”

The legislation, known as the Family Smoking Prevention and Tobacco Control Act, would for the first time empower the Food and Drug Administration to measure and restrict the harmful chemical components in tobacco and cigarette smoke. It would also require the agency to review new tobacco products; ban the use of terms like “light” and “low tar” that might misleadingly suggest those products were safer; require new, larger health warnings on cigarette packages; and tighten restrictions on marketing and advertising.

The legislation is being shepherded through the Senate by Christopher J. Dodd, Democrat of Connecticut. Although the effort’s longtime champion, Edward M. Kennedy, Democrat of Massachusetts, was not present because he is battling brain cancer, Mr. Kennedy’s legacy was invoked often in the debate last week.

But it was a Republican, John McCain of Arizona, who first brought comprehensive tobacco legislation to the Senate floor 11 years ago. Philip Morris, then and now the nation’s dominant cigarette maker with the Marlboro brand, initially supported it. But after Mr. McCain toughened the proposal, raising the financial liability for cigarette makers, Philip Morris led a $40 million industry lobbying and public relations campaign against the bill. It fell three votes short in a Senate filibuster.

This year, Philip Morris has steadfastly endorsed the legislation, parts of which the company helped write. More than 1,000 health, medical and religious groups have endorsed it as the best chance to regulate tobacco.

A smaller number of public health advocates are concerned about Philip Morris’s role. And the second- and third-largest tobacco companies, Reynolds America and Lorillard Tobacco, both based in North Carolina, are fighting the measure. They say it would lock in Philip Morris’s market dominance.

Mr. Burr is a first-term senator from Winston-Salem, N.C., the home of Reynolds America, the maker of Camel cigarettes and newer, smokeless products, which he said would be banned by the F.D.A. requirements.

The legislation would set tough standards for industry efforts to promote new products as lower risk. A company would have to show that new products not only reduced harm for current smokers, but also “benefit the health of the population as a whole, taking into account the impact on both users and nonusers of tobacco products.” The phrase encompasses nonsmokers and would-be quitters who might be tempted to try the new products rather than abstain.

Mr. Burr said that was a nearly impossible standard even for lower-risk products like snus, a packaged, powdered tobacco developed in Sweden that is placed under the lip, and dissolvable smokeless tobacco products like pellets and filmlike strips.

But Jeff Merkley, Democrat of Oregon, said in Senate debate that those products were intended to addict a new generation of children. He termed them “tobacco candy.”

Richard J. Durbin, Democrat of Illinois, said, “The tobacco companies know that if they’re going to have 400,000 of their customers die each year, that they have to replace them with children.”

An alternative proposal filed by Mr. Burr and Kay Hagan, Democrat of North Carolina, would set up a tobacco office in the Department of Health and Human Services to promote cessation and “reduced harm” products.

Mr. Burr said Thursday evening that his alternative had about 45 supporters in the Senate. But the stricter F.D.A. bill had 58 co-sponsors.